[prober] delete rid-related tests from prober

[Shastick]

Remove the RID parts of the prober, which are now entirely covered by the qualifier.

Closes #744

[barroco]

@Shastick could you please check references to the prober in the dss repo documentation and make sure we properly update it in order to maintain the same level of testing by documenting the uss qualifier usage?
Example: https://github.com/interuss/dss/blob/master/build/pooling.md#establishing-a-pool-with-first-instance

[Shastick]

@Shastick could you please check references to the prober in the dss repo documentation and make sure we properly update it in order to maintain the same level of testing by documenting the uss qualifier usage? Example: https://github.com/interuss/dss/blob/master/build/pooling.md#establishing-a-pool-with-first-instance

I did a first pass on the DSS repo (see interuss/dss#1066): I essentially mentioned the qualifier wherever the prober was being mentioned.

[mickmis]

Could you tell me how you ensured that all of those prober tests are now covered by USS qualifier scenarios? I do see that all of those tests seem to have a matching scenario, but then did you make a pass to ensure that all test cases are covered? Thanks!

[Shastick]

Could you tell me how you ensured that all of those prober tests are now covered by USS qualifier scenarios? I do see that all of those tests seem to have a matching scenario, but then did you make a pass to ensure that all test cases are covered? Thanks!

See #744 for the details.

The relevant part:

The following gap analysis is based on both the older InterUSS Backlog as well as a manual check of the prober files and their corresponding qualifier scenarios for RID.

[mickmis]

Change LGTM, but shouldn't we wait for the dss repo to use the uss_qualifier for probing instead of the prober before merging?
Because in the meantime if we need to change something in the prober for the CI in the DSS, we will have an issue.

[Shastick]

Yes, I'd wait before merging this. We also still need a release of the monitoring repo in order to be able to use the qualifier.

[Shastick]

interuss/dss#1045 has landed. @mickmis we should have proper coverage on the DSS repo without the prober as of this moment and this PR can be merged.

[mickmis]

LGTM
Branch needs to be updated though. @Shastick can I just update the branch through github or will you take care of it? Actually not really needed, my bad.